Bills Digest no. 39 2009–10
Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services
and Amenities) Bill 2009
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage history
Purpose
Background
Financial implications
Main provisions
Concluding comments
Contact officer & copyright details
Passage history
Date
introduced: 9 September
2009
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Education
Commencement:
The formal provisions
commence on Royal Assent. Schedule 1 commences six months from the
day of Royal Assent or earlier by Proclamation.
Links: The
relevant links to the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum and second
reading speech can be accessed via BillsNet, which is at http://www.aph.gov.au/bills/
When Bills have been passed they can be found at ComLaw, which is
at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/.
The Bill amends the Higher
Education Support Act 2003 (the Act) to:
- Allow higher education providers to charge students an annual
capped compulsory student services and amenities fee from ( on or
after ) 1 July 2009, and
- Introduce a new Higher Education Loan Program (HELP) category
for student amenities fees called Services and Amenities-HELP
(SA-HELP).
The Bill also amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936
to account for the new SA-HELP provisions.
The issue of student services and
amenities fees, also called student union fees, has been before
Parliament on many occasions, most recently with the Higher
Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services and Amenities,
and other Measures) Bill 2009 ( the old bill ) which was defeated
in the Senate in August.[1] The other measures relating to VET FEE-HELP in the old
bill are now in a separate bill.[2] The provisions in regard to student amenities fees
are reintroduced unchanged in the Bill.
Compulsory student union fees were abolished with the passage of
the Howard Government s Higher Education Support Amendment
(Abolition of Compulsory Upfront Student Union Fees) Bill
2005.[3] The effect
of the Higher Education Support Amendment (Abolition of
Compulsory Upfront Student Union Fees) Act 2005, is that
section 19-37 of the Higher Education Support Act (the
Act) prevents a higher education provider requiring a student to be
a member of a student association, union or guild and prevents a
compulsory fee for facilities, amenities or services that are not
of an academic nature. Compliance with VSU legislation is a
condition of continued approval as a higher education provider and
a condition of Commonwealth grants to providers.
To allay concerns of National Party Senators and Senator
Fielding on the impact of VSU on regional campuses and on
recreational and sporting activities, the Howard Government
provided $100 million of transition funding to universities through
three competitive funding programmes.[4] The VSU Transition Fund for
Recreational and Sporting Facilities, allocated $85 million for 44
projects,[5] the
Small Businesses on Regional Campuses Fund allocated $5 million for
19 projects,[6] and
the Regional University Sport Programme is providing $10 million
over four years to Australian University Sport (AUS).
However the Australasian Campus Union Managers Association
(ACUMA) and AUS concluded the grants available from the VSU
Transition Fund do not address the shortfalls in recurrent funding
and provide only temporary respite from the pressing capital needs
of the sector .[7]
In November 2007, after one year of VSU, AUS and ACUMA reported
an annual reduction of $166 million in funding from amenities and
services fees (they expected this to rise to $200 million in 2009),
a loss of 1000 jobs (or a reduction in employment of 30 per cent),
increased direct charges to students and user pays charges
increasing in most cases above the Consumer Price Index
(CPI).[8]
In February 2008, the Hon Kate Ellis MP, Minister for Youth,
undertook consultations with and invited submissions from
stakeholders on the impact of the current VSU policy. The
Impact of Voluntary Student Unionism on Services, Amenities and
Representation for Australian University Students Summary
Report concluded:
Most submissions concluded that the abolition
of upfront compulsory student union fees had impacted negatively on
the provision of amenities and services to university students,
with the greatest impact at smaller and regional universities and
campuses.
Many noted that the introduction of VSU had
forced rationalisations, and that current levels of services were
more limited than had previously been the case.
In many instances, assistance was provided by
the university but these funds were redirected from other uses such
as teaching, learning or research.
While a user‐pays model worked for some
services (e.g. food and beverage outlets), it was reported that
this type of delivery commonly resulted in increased costs to
individual students.
Many submissions put forward the view that VSU
had resulted in a lessening of the vibrancy, diversity and, to some
extent, the attractiveness of university life.
VSU had commonly resulted in an increase in
fees, which had led to a decrease in the number of clubs and/or in
club membership.
While most submissions focussed on the negative
effects of VSU on student services and amenities, some institutions
did report some benefits. These included the streamlining and more
efficient delivery of services to suit student needs, the opening
up of the provision of services to a commercial model, and
consultation with students to determine what could be defined as
essential services.
Most submissions indicated that the capacity
for student advocacy and democratic student representation had been
significantly reduced since VSU.
Submissions reported that, at a number of
universities, there was no longer a student union. In other
instances, a number of student groups had been merged into one
body.
Some institutions commented that there had been
benefits from VSU in terms of student representation and, in
particular, that representation was now from a broader
base.[9]
The Australian Labor Party in opposition promised to restore
campus amenities, services and student representation free from
Government dictates and interference . In the ALP s white paper on
education, shadow spokesperson, Jenny Macklin, proposed that the
provision and funding of services would be formulated through
compact negotiations between the university and Government , and
that the financial imposition on students will not increase.
Additionally as part of the compact negotiations universities would
need to demonstrate that an independent, democratic and securely
funded student representative body exists .[10]
Following the ALP s National Conference in May 2007 the shadow
spokesperson Stephen Smith outlined the party s policy:
I made it clear at the National Conference, and
this was acknowledged by a number of delegates, that it wasn t
appropriate for Labor, and Labor would not be able to go back to
the pre-Voluntary Student Unionism world and that was accepted by
the Conference and accepted by delegates.
Labor s priority here is to do two things as
outlined in the Platform: Firstly, to ensure that students, if they
so choose, can voluntarily organise themselves into representative
organisations. Secondly, and more importantly, that all students
have access to decent amenities and services, whether that s
sporting facilities, cultural facilities, child-care facilities and
the like.
The funding of those services has been a matter
of conversation between me and the Universities. I believe that the
Commonwealth, the Government of the day, has a responsibility,
together with the Universities, to fund those services and of
course it s also appropriate for students, if they so choose, to
make a voluntary contribution to those services, or indeed to be
charged a fee if that is appropriate when they use those services
such as sporting facilities, gyms and the like.
To a journalist s question Stephen Smith stated I certainly do
not have on my list an extension of HECS, either voluntary or
compulsory, to fund these services. So I absolutely rule that out I
believe that these services should be provided either by the
Universities, or by the Commonwealth or both .[11]
The Bill implements the general thrust of the policy to restore
services and student representation without a return to the
pre-Voluntary Student Unionism world . However the compulsory fee,
the proposed SA-HELP, the lack of government funding and the degree
of government regulation and compliance are major diversions from
the government s policy in opposition.
Following the government s consultation on the impact of VSU the
Minister, the Hon Kate Ellis announced that
From 1 July 2009, universities will be allowed
to set a compulsory fee, capped at a maximum of $250 with
indexation each year, to help rebuild student amenities and student
services To help students manage the fee the Australian Government
will provide access to a HECS style loan under the Higher Education
Loan Program (HELP). SA HELP will allow eligible students to defer
the payment of the fee if they choose.
The Minister stressed that this was not a return to compulsory
student unionism and the provision which prohibits a university
from requiring a student to be a member of a student organisation
will remain . The Minister also announced a new requirement for
universities to meet national benchmarks relating to access to
student support services and fulfil new representation and advocacy
protocols .[12]
The Bill is not proposing to reintroduce student union fees in
that funds will be administered by higher education providers
rather than student unions. Furthermore providers must not spend
the collected funds to provide support to a political party or to
support a candidate for political office.[13] However the Bill is proposing that a
capped student amenities fee can be charged by a higher education
provider and made compulsory. Consequently the reaction to the Bill
is framed within the context of previous debates on compulsory
student union fees. These debates go back to the Whitlam Government
s proposal that the Commonwealth assume full responsibility for
financing higher education. Tuition fees were to be abolished, but
student representative council, union and sports fees would remain
the responsibility of the student, to be collected by the
institution.[14]
Journalist Charles Richardson, a life member of the Australian
Liberal Students Federation, has argued VSU arouses political
passions out of all proportion to its intrinsic importance. It is
also a peculiarly fossilised debate, since positions on both sides
were set some 30 years ago when university funding arrangements,
not to mention the ideological landscape in general, were very
different.[15]
Political passions have again arisen in the debate on the old bill
with the Coalition describing the proposed legislation as having
the same stench as Compulsory Student Unionism .[16] Debate on the old bill was
similarly grounded in the ideological arguments of the previous
thirty years. The coalition s opposition to the old bill was
largely grounded in the belief that the proposed legislation was
compulsory student unionism by another name. Senator Abetz
described the services and amenities fee as compulsory student
unionism: It does not matter how you try to dress it up; it is an
infringement on individuals rights and liberties, especially the
right to a tertiary education. To be denied the right to a tertiary
education because you do not want to pay a student union fee, now
dressed up as an amenities fee, is abhorrent to every instinct
within me .[17]
Coalition senators in their dissenting committee report also argued
the fee was an unnecessary added expense for students. They also
expressed concern that the old bill provided inadequate protection
against political activity and inadequate mechanisms for students
to scrutinise expenditure. [18]
Australasian Campus Union Managers Association (ACUMA),
Australian University Sport (AUS) and Universities Australia
welcomed the old bill as a means of restoring student
services.[19]
Universities Australia has called for the government to implement
the policy commitment to a new student services and amenities fee
through successful negotiation of passage of the legislation and
speedy implementation of the policy .[20]
The Australian Liberal Students Federation ran an online
campaign against the old bill and continue to oppose the
Bill.[21] Other
student groups, including the National Union of Students and the
Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations are concerned over
the provisions that prevent funds going directly to student
associations.[22]
The NUS told the Senate Committee hearing into the old bill
that:
We are disappointed by this legislation.
Student representation has been hit hardest by the introduction of
VSU. This new law will not be good enough to restore the student
voice on campus. It has long been our position that students should
decide how their money is spent on campus and to politically
organise to activate those views. They will not have the ability
under the new legislation to do this. In fact, this law may act as
a disincentive to voluntary membership on campus voluntary
membership that could fund an independent voice.[23]
Their concerns were supported by the Greens who called for more
effective student advocacy in additional comments to the committee
report and during debate on the old bill.[24]
In the lead up to the debate on the old bill the leader of the
National Party in the Senate, Senator Joyce, was reported to be
considering crossing the floor suggesting other Nationals may join
him in abandoning the Liberal Party s holy grail of voluntary
student unionism because it had been a fiasco that had punished
country students who enjoyed playing sport .[25] National Party senators were prepared
to support an amended bill. Senators Joyce, Williams and Nash moved
an amendment to allow sporting and recreational facilities to be
covered by an amenities fee but the amendment was defeated.[26] National Party
senators did not cross the floor and the old bill was defeated.
They will again be crucial to the passage of the Bill. At a meeting
of the Federal Council of the National Party shortly after the
defeat of the old bill the party agreed to support[s] the
introduction of a deferrable, compulsory tertiary student services
fee for the purposes of funding sport and healthcare at
universities, but recommends that discounts or exemptions be
considered for external students .[27] However the Bill s provisions will
not restrict universities to spending the amenities fees only on
sport and healthcare facilities.
Recognising the importance of National Party senators to the
passage of the Bill, the second reading speech by the Hon Richard
Marles, focuses on the National Party. It commends the party for
their commitment to students from rural and regional areas and
calls on the party to support the bill arguing it is in the best
interests of rural and regional universities and their
students.[28]
The Bill does not propose a return to compulsory student union
membership. Therefore the argument that compulsory student union
membership infringes upon the fundamental right to freedom of
association in this respect is irrelevant. However it could be
argued that the compulsory fee constitutes a subsidy for services
that the student may not wish to utilise. For example, many
part-time and external students may never use the facilities and
services, but still have to pay the annual charge. Universities
Australia argue that not all students may use these services during
their study, but is firmly of the view that it is better for all
students to contribute to the provision of the services, which are
then available to all, than to not have the services available to
those who need them. Additionally, such services will provide a
safety net for those students who had begun their study with no
need for the services, but whose situations change for the worse
during the course of their study .[29]
Professor Jane den Hollander, convenor of Universities Australia
Deputy Vice-Chancellors Committee, describes the proposed SA-HELP
as complex, complicated and confusing for students and annoying and
time consuming for everyone .[30]
There is some argument for reducing duplication, administration
and cost through incorporating the loan for the $250 amenities fee
into the existing HECS-HELP system. Universities Australia CEO,
Glenn Withers, expressed hope that delay in the passage of the old
bill would give the Government time to reconsider the introduction
of the separate SA-HELP.[31] However the provisions remain unchanged in the
Bill.
The proposal not to return to a system where student unions
received the bulk of the funds and provided most of the services is
cause for debate. The Newcastle University Students Association
(NUSA) point out that this legislation does not prohibit
universities from funding student organisations. However, student
organisations which are properly performing their role, including
holding universities to account, are unlikely to attract funding
from the university as this represents a conflict of interest
.[32] The Council
of Australian Postgraduate Associations (CAPA) argue that student
representation and academic advocacy can only be effective where it
is truly independent, and that it cannot be truly independent where
the university has discretionary control over 100% of student money
under this fee. [33] CAPA recommends that the Guidelines should require
providers to make a fixed amount or proportion of the fee directly
to student organisations and that provisions that prevent that
should be deleted from the Bill.[34]
Universities Australia welcomes the freedom to contract services
to providers other than student unions as the Unions may not be the
most appropriate providers of these services and amenities
envisaged by this Amendment. [35]
A 2004 Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee survey found
student services and amenities charges ranged from $100 to more
than $350. The median was in the range $200 to $250.[36] The fees raised $172.8
million of which $24.8 million or 14 per cent was spent on
advocacy, representation and political activity.[37] In 2007 there were 664,381
full-time students and 312,405 part-time students at Australia s
public universities. Assuming universities charge full-time
students $250 and part-time students $125 the fees would raise $205
million. With the restriction on payments for political activity
this should be sufficient to reinstate a range of services at most
universities. Those universities which charged more than $300 in
2004 may need to provide additional funds from other sources of
income. ACUMA is concerned that the $250 cap will be inadequate if
the government s intent is that the capped fee also provide for the
on-going capital infrastructure needs (inclusive of deferred
maintenance liabilities on existing buildings and
construction/acquisition of new buildings and grounds/facilities)
of the campus services sector .[38]
An alternative view is put by the University of Queensland Union
which opposes the introduction of the services and amenities fee:
VSU has not resulted in a lessening of campus culture or available
services and activities ... The UQ Union has been able to maintain
all essential representational and advocacy services that were
provided before VSU and is constantly investing in new areas that
will encourage further involvement and awareness of the Union s
services .[39]
The Bill in new section 19-38 proposes to prohibit student
services and amenities funds supporting political parties or the
campaigns of those seeking political office. Higher education
providers will be given further guidance on the legitimate
disbursements of funds in the proposed Student Services and
Amenities Fee Guidelines (the Fee Guidelines ).[40] The proposed Fee Guidelines,
released by the Minister on 19 February 2009, allow support of a
range of activities including clubs and societies .[41] Universities may find
they are in conflict with the new legislation if the activities of
such clubs and societies are interpreted as supporting a political
party. As the Australian Liberal Students Foundation points out:
There are numerous student organisations that are political in
nature that will be eligible to receive monies compulsorily
acquired from students, as the majority of political groups on
campus would not meet these requirements In fact, the Australian
Liberal Students Federation will not be prevented from obtaining
money from a student organisation, as it is not a political party
per se .[42]
This may have been a legitimate concern if the amendment to
introduce SA-HELP had not been introduced. Over a three year degree
a full-time student will pay a maximum $750. Universities Australia
has calculated that this will represent 3.6% of the total HELP debt
of a graduating student with an average HELP debt of
$20,579.[43]
The Explanatory Memorandum states the estimated financial impact
of SA-HELP over the period 2008 09 is $200.403 million in expenses
and -$97.909 million on fiscal balance .[44]
Schedule 1 amends the Act and deals with the proposed student
services and amenities fee.
Item 4 adds three new subsections to section
19-37 of the Act. Proposed subsection 19-37(4)
allows providers to charge a compulsory student services and
amenities fee. Proposed subsection 19-37(5)
defines the student services and amenities fee amount which must be
determined in accordance with the Student Services and Amenities
Fee Guidelines (the Fee Guidelines). The guidelines are made under
section 238-10 of the Act and are disallowable instruments.
Proposed Fee Guidelines were released by the Minister on 19
February 2009.[45]
Proposed paragraph 19-37(5)(e) sets an upper limit of $250 for
annual fees from 2010, though this limit is indexed.
The Bill does not change existing subsection 19-37(1) which
prohibits a higher education provider requiring a person to be a
member of a student organisation.
Item 5 proposes a new section
19-38 that defines the spending of student services and
amenities fees. The fees cannot be used to support, or to pay a
person or organisation to support, a political party or the
election of a person to a Commonwealth, State or Territory
legislature; or to a local government body. Political party is not
defined under the Bill or existing Act. Proposed subsection
19-38(3) limits the spending of the student services and
amenities fees to purposes specified in the Student Services and
Amenities Fee Guidelines (the Fee Guidelines ).
The Fee Guidelines will be vital if providers are to
successfully comply with the legislation. The proposed Fee
Guidelines include seventeen categories of allowable services and
amenities and states:
Allowable uses of the fee in relation to
services and amenities may include the categories listed below. In
all cases the purpose would include but not be limited to, the
direct provision of the service or amenity, the provision of
infrastructure (including new construction) and subsidies that
would reduce the price that students may have to pay.
Already Universities Australia and CAPA have identified a range
of services that they consider should be added to the list.
Consultation with higher education providers will be necessary to
ensure the final Fee Guidelines introduced are not in a form that
requires numerous amendments.[46]
Item 6 proposes a new section
19-67 requiring higher education providers that receive
funding under the Commonwealth Grants Scheme to comply, from 2010,
with Student Services, Amenities, Representation and Advocacy
Guidelines (the Advocacy Guidelines ). The Advocacy Guidelines will
detail the National Access to Services Benchmarks, and require
providers to provide information on, and access to, non academic
student support services. The Advocacy Guidelines will also include
National Student Representation and Advocacy Protocols to ensure
there are opportunities for students to be part of institutional
decision making and have access to advocacy services.[47] The Advocacy
Guidelines will be made under section 238-10 of the Act and will be
disallowable instruments. Proposed subsection
19-67(4) states subsection 19-65(1) does
not apply in relation to the Student Services, Amenities,
Representation and Advocacy Guidelines. 19-65(1) of the Act states
A higher education provider must comply with the requirements of
this Act, the regulations and the Guidelines made under section
238-10 . The National Union of Students in its submission to the
Senate Inquiry on the old bill expressed some concern that the
Advocacy Guidelines are not legally enforceable: NUS is somewhat
mystified why these Guidelines should be exempted from the
compliance requirement of the Act .[48] The National Tertiary Education Union
(NTEU) also seeks clarification as to the purpose of clause (4)
under proposed Section 19-67, which appears to remove the Student
Services, Amenities, Representation and Advocacy Guidelines from
compliance requirements for higher education providers .[49] Certainly neither the
Second reading Speech nor the Explanatory Memorandum provide any
rationale for the exemption.
Item 10 proposes a new Part
3-5 that introduces a new Higher Education Loan Program
(HELP) category for student services and amenities fees called
Services and Amenities-HELP (SA-HELP).
SA-HELP will allow eligible students to defer the payment of the
student services and amenities fees if they choose and add it to
other income contingent HELP loans taken during their study.
Concluding comments
The issue of student amenities fees has historically generated
passionate debate, both in parliaments and in the public domain,
much of it centred on the issue of student unionism and the
compulsory payment of fees to student organisations. The Bill
implements a middle path in the policy debate. It meets a
government promise to restore campus amenities, services and
student representation which have been heavily cut since the Howard
Government enacted the 2005 voluntary student unionism legislation
without restoring compulsory student unionism. However it does
propose a compulsory fee which will be administered by higher
education providers who must in turn comply with the provisions of
the Higher Education Support Act and the requirements of
the Advocacy Guidelines and the Fee Guidelines made under the Act.
The compulsory element of the fee will continue to generate debate
of a philosophical and ideological nature. However Parliament may
need to scrutinise the details in the Bill and the proposed
Advocacy Guidelines and Fee Guidelines to ensure that higher
education providers have clarity in their administration of the
student services and amenities fees and compliance with the
legislation.
Members, Senators and Parliamentary staff can obtain further
information from the Parliamentary Library on (02) 6277 2709.
[2]. Higher
Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Tertiary Admission
Centres) Bill 2009,
http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fbillhome%2Fr4194%22
[3]. It was the
fourth attempt by the Howard Government to abolish compulsory
student union fees: In 1996 the Howard Government introduced the
Higher Education Funding Amendment Bill (No.2) 1996 to
repeal provisions providing Commonwealth assistance to student
organisations where State or Territory legislation had prevented
the imposition of student organisation fees. The Bill did not
proceed through the Senate. In 1999 the Higher Education
Legislation Amendment Bill 1999 did not progress through the
Senate. In September 2003, the Higher Education Support Amendment
(Abolition of Compulsory Up-front Student Union Fees) Bill 2003 did
not proceed beyond the second reading.
[4]. PM steals
victory on uni fees , The Australian, 10 December 2005, A
Fraser, Student unions bill goes through , Canberra Times,
10 December 2005, D Wroe, PM has win on student unions , The
Age, 10 December 2005.
[5]. For a list
of the projects and funding committed see:
http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/programmes_funding/VSUF.htm
viewed 13 October 2009.
[6]. For a list
of the projects and funding committed see:
http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/programmes_funding/programme_categories/small_business_regional_uni/default.htm
[7].
Australasian Campus Union Managers Association (ACUMA) VSU impact
study overview ACUMA website: http://www.acuma.org.au/resource_library/vsu/index.htm
viewed 13 October 2009.
[8]. Peter
McDonald et al, VSU Impact Study: a Study on the Impact of
Voluntary Student Unionism Legislation at Universities across
Australia, (First draft release) Australian University Sport,
Milton Qld, November 2007, pp. 1 4, http://www.unisport.com.au/_uploads/res/1_1825.pdf
viewed 13 October 2009, and Peter McDonald et al, VSU
Impact Study: a Study on the Impact of Voluntary Student Unionism
Legislation at Universities across Australia, (Second draft
release) Australian University Sport, Milton Qld, February
2008,
pp. 1 4, http://www.unigames.com.au/_uploads/res/1_1893.pdf
viewed 13 October 2009.
[9]. Impact
of Voluntary Student Unionism on Services, Amenities and
Representation for Australian University Students Summary
Report, DEEWR, Canberra, July 2008. http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/0BC037DB-1F39-452D-8947-225E63A85DB1/22931/VSUSummaryReport_W2finalfromPublications3.pdf
viewed 20 February 2009.
[10].
Australia s universities: building our future in the world: a
white paper on higher education, research and innovation,
Australian Labor Party, Canberra, 2006, p. 74,
http://parlinfo/parlInfo/download/library/partypol/1LBK6/upload_binary/1lbk65.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%22amenities%20%20student%22
viewed 13 October 2009.
[11]. S Smith
(Shadow Minister for Education and Training), Transcript of
Doorstop, Subject: Voluntary Student Unionism; Mike Bailey,
Government Extravagance, media release, Parliament House,
Canberra, 22 May 2007,
http://parlinfo/parlInfo/download/media/pressrel/EY4N6/upload_binary/ey4n61.pdf;fileType=application/pdf#search=%222000s%20smith%20hecs%22
viewed 13 October 2009.
[12]. K Ellis (Minister for Youth), Rebuilding
Student Support Services in our Universities, media release,
Canberra, 3 November 2008,
http://www.deewr.gov.au/Ministers/Ellis/Media/Releases/Pages/Article_081130_112847.aspx
viewed 13 October 2009.
[43]. Universities Australia, Submission to Inquiry
into the Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services
and Amenities, and Other Measures) Bill 2009, Universities
Australia, Canberra, February 2009,
http://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/documents/publications/policy/submissions/UniAus-Student-Serv-Amen-Sub-Feb-09.pdf
viewed 12 October 2009
[45]. K Ellis
(Minister for Youth), Securing the future of university support
services, media release, 19 February 2009; Student Services
and Amenities Fee Guidelines
http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/2B5C712C-FE76-451E-839F-22F8A377F162/25473/090218StudentServicesandAmenitiesFeeGuidelines.pdf
viewed 12 October 2009.
[46].
Universities Australia, Submission to Inquiry into the Higher
Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services and Amenities,
and Other Measures) Bill 2009, Universities Australia, Canberra,
February 2009,
http://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/documents/publications/policy/submissions/UniAus-Student-Serv-Amen-Sub-Feb-09.pdf
viewed 12 October 2009; Council of Australian Postgraduate
Associations (CAPA), Submission to the Senate Inquiry into the
Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services and
Amenities, and Other Measures) Bill 2009, CAPA, Carlton South,
February 2009, p. 13,
https://senate.aph.gov.au/submissions/comittees/viewdocument.aspx?id=b5f01f65-a2f1-4e0d-ba7b-295f7cb68820
viewed 12 October 2009.
[47]. Student
Services, Amenities, Representation and Advocacy Guidelines
http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/7E49B522-3A12-4581-9D3C-CA3B4561A703/25471/090218StudentServicesAmenitiesRepresentationandAdv.pdf
viewed 12 October 2009.
[48].
National Union of Students (NUS) Submission to the Senate Committee
Inquiry into the Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student
Services and Amenities, and Other Measures Bill 2009), February
2009,
https://senate.aph.gov.au/submissions/comittees/viewdocument.aspx?id=51cada71-42c5-48e5-8c70-caa0cbfdfa99
viewed 12 October 2009.
[49]. The
National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU), Submission to the Senate
Committee Inquiry into the Higher Education Legislation Amendment
(Student Services and Amenities, and Other Measures Bill 2009),
NTEU, South Melbourne, 20 February 2009,
https://senate.aph.gov.au/submissions/comittees/viewdocument.aspx?id=6130a3a7-09ac-4066-84f5-f2bf106e2d51
viewed 12 October 2009.
Coral Dow
16 October 2009
Bills Digest Service
Parliamentary Library
© Commonwealth of Australia
This work is copyright. Except to the extent of uses permitted
by the Copyright Act 1968, no person may reproduce or transmit any
part of this work by any process without the prior written consent
of the Parliamentary Librarian. This requirement does not apply to
members of the Parliament of Australia acting in the course of
their official duties.
This work has been prepared to support the work of the Australian
Parliament using information available at the time of production.
The views expressed do not reflect an official position of the
Parliamentary Library, nor do they constitute professional legal
opinion.
Feedback is welcome and may be provided to: web.library@aph.gov.au. Any
concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary
Librarian. Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the
contents of publications with Senators and Members and their staff.
To access this service, clients may contact the author or the
Library’s Central Entry Point for referral.
Back to top